Novation has unveiled this week their own “free” step sequencer offering for Ableton Live. It’s some lovely work, with basic melodic pattern playback that comes alive once you add some envelopes.

It’s a cool creation — but for me, it’s massively overshadowed by a new video featuring the upcoming Renoise 2.5 beta with the same Launchpad controller.

I’ll introduce it by saying, simply… hot damn.

And what a difference you get in price. Of course, to use either, you’ll need a Launchpad, currently running around US$200. But for the Renoise solution, you need only spend an additional US$75/EUR49 for everything. For the “free” patch for Live, you’ll need Ableton Live 8 or higher plus the Max for Live add-on, which even with current sale deals will set you back US$698 (unless you own some previous software, though even then, you’re unlikely to get down to $75). Free after an investment of nearly a grand is a bit of a stretch.

Now, trackers aren’t for everyone, as with any tool, some of you own Live already, and I’m all for spending more money when you need to. So I don’t want to harp on the price issue alone, even if we are talking more than $600 (an 800%+) difference.

Instead, look at the results. Renoise’s Matrix View is simply astounding – perhaps as much so as the first time I saw the Session View in Live. Rather than being an independent patch, this is the innards of Renoise under control here. Each individual step is a pattern. It can easily retrigger notes. It can do melodic patterns, if you like, but each step can have an individual pattern, each pattern can be directly edited in your actual arrangement file using the controller. You don’t have to touch the mouse. And while fader control of additional parameters isn’t there yet, it’s coming.

Oh yeah — and it’s a video step sequencer, too. (That’s thanks to Jitter, though it’s not presently in this release because of some performance issues.)

In this case, the ingredient remains Cycling ’74′s powerful patching tool, Max/MSP. But because the standalone version of that package – unlike Max for Live – includes a free run-time, you don’t have to buy Max to use the results. Also, even Max may not be necessary in the future, as later in the year 2010, the developers of Renoise will offer MIDI control scripts, Lua scripting of the environment, and OpenSoundControl. This functionality appears to be something you’ll get with the package, not something you’ll need to spend hundreds of dollars to use. The reason Max is necessary now is simply to map the Launchpad’s someone arbitrarily-mapped bi-directional MIDI to Renoise’s eminently-controllable grid. (Jitter is, in turn, used for video output, though that could work elsewhere.) With these functions integrated directly into Renoise – something sorely lacking in Ableton Live – you’ll be able to do more, more easily. With OSC sent from a device like the monome or (hopefully soon) Livid Instruments’ Ohm line, you ought to be able to just plug in the device for direct control.

It’ll also be easier to interchange devices, whereas some of the recent Max for Live devices are tied to specific controllers.

Don’t get me wrong – these are different tools. While scripting Renoise opens up a number of terrific possibilities, it won’t do everything that Max 5 (standalone) and/or Max for Live can do. For instance, if you’re looking to build your own video sequencer, you do want a separate tool, and you may indeed want the power of being able to drop that patch creation right into Live.

The point for me is that the core program itself in Renoise is controllable here, which for certain workflows can be an edge.

Competition is good. I’m certainly inspired to work on my own step sequencer creations and trying to make them better. And Novation has lucked out here, because I expect I’ve just sold them a few more Launchpads. But sorry, Ableton – I fully expect some Renoise users to find a way to tattoo their program of choice onto the hardware, as in this mock-up. This round goes to Renoise and the ingenious work of patch creator Johann Baron Lanteigne.

Depending on your tool of choice, if you’re a Launchpad owner, go grab now – and stay tuned for more step-sequencer-on-host action. Yum.

PS, Ableton, Cycling ’74, don’t feel bad. I did get to see the step sequencer creations by Little Scale last night at our party. They’re obvious choices for Max for Live, and he’s only had the Launchpad for a few weeks.

In fact, I think the best thing that could possibly happen is for all the Launchpad, monome, Ohm, Ableton, Renoise, SuperCollider, chip music, and other fans to throw down and let the out-step-sequencing battles begin.

Here's my entry into the step sequencing battle, launched a few weeks ago:http://blog.lividinstruments.com/?p=762
This works on the Ohm64 and block controllers in Max4 live. Step sequencing, synth playing, editing, and loop recording all in one controller.

http://www.createdigitalmusic.com Peter Kirn

@Peter – indeed, and very nice work. Need to write that up separately. Will you make a standalone version, you think?

Now, I do think I'll have to test the Ohm (+Block) with Renoise, especially once Lua scripting happens.

http://www.lividinstruments.com peter Nyboer

Thanks Standalone version will be appearing sometime in January.

digidad

There are a lot of wonderful new toys out there, but what strikes me after watching each and every demo of them is that ALL the music sounds the same. Either it's terrible, IDM-ish electronica ala 1999, or, as in the Renoise demo above, breakbeats ala 1992.

It bores me to tears. So, the irony is that while these new toys are supposed to make composing and mixing and remixing and musicmaking in general more fun and perhaps even add some gravity to it, all demos are more or less the same.

Also, but this is probably just me, I'm a bit fed up with the focus always being on beats, and even 4/4 beats. That probably makes me old, but where are the demos that might resemble Microstoria? Oval? John Wall? Bernard Parmegiani? Thomas Köner?

I may be overstating and oversimplifying my point, but if this is the wonderful new world, where is all the wonderful new music (ok, I know- Flying Lotus has made some fantastic music using Live etc., but still)?

http://www.createdigitalmusic.com Peter Kirn

That's fair criticism, digidad. My enthusiasm in this case is because the mechanics of the tool are very impressive, and I believe capable of leading to other things (particularly Renoise's matrix view). This particular video to me seemed just a quick initial demo, and it's reasonable to assume when you've just completed something, you might just do something that shows the tool rather than come up with something entirely original (or you might never get round to shooting the video)! Little Scale's rig was impressive last night, too, also with the Launchpad, but his music – which was far more polished – was with tools he's evolved and tested over a period of many months. So, if something is new, odds are it *isn't* ready for a polished musical construction just yet.

As for the focus being "beats," well, beats are just another term for rhythm, and if that's getting tiresome — even when limited to 4/4 — it's probably a lack of rhythmic imagination, not the fact that they're beats! But fair enough – I'll echo your call for other things.

Let's see other things, absolutely.

I think the musical demos, though, likely will remain separate from the tech demos. By the time you've gotten comfortable enough with the tool to make great music, the focus is likely to be on the great music, not the tool. I like seeing the tools when they're still raw, but I'd also like to talk more about the music that has gotten to a mature point, as well.

PS – Flying Lotus does a lot of his work in Reason, not just Live.

Le k

@digidad

i m 100% agree with you!

Let s make some futurisc parmegianniaphexpusher!!

Nick Dima

Is it possible with any of this max 4 live sequencers to actually edit midi clips as you're playing with the pads?

jbl

@ Nick Dima

I bet it would be possible if the sequencer is playing a clip inside on live rather than only a note inside the sequencer. I'd rather have my step sequencer triggering very short clips than single notes.

It is possible with max4live to edit live clips, even each individual midi notes inside the clip. It's just it's an immature thing at the moment – I'll bet you there is going to be some serious useful stuff out there at some point

griotspeak

@padavid – yes

the CS step sequencer does it.

i cobbled a patch together to sequence with a monome as well.

http://www.createdigitalmusic.com Peter Kirn

By the way, part of the reason I try not to be shy about my opinions is, I know it's a reasonable way to find out whether people agree — and to have my own ideas challenged.

So with that in mind, anyone want to take to issue my sense of why Renoise's controllable Matrix View has some advantages over Max > Live API > Live, or even just having to build things in Max — aside from price?

s ford

Let's not forget Venetian Snares uses Renoise and pretty much little else to make his music. IMO Rossz, HCBU, My Downfall are up there with the finest electronic music or even music which has ever been recorded.

I actually agree with Digidad for the best part of the time, but his statement is a little misformed as Snares posted up a clip of one of his tune scrolling down in Renoise. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGK-EzEa45U

Personally, back to a lot of the videos which showcase technology I have seen little to nothing which shows the technology not to be fucking pointless. Shitloads of videos of Monome action have been posted and IMO 99% of them have all made shit music. Apart from the Edison one which was great and in that he was pretty much using it as the pads of a MPC.

Great new technology doesn't always equate to great music. If it did then the guitar would have died with the coming of the synth!! The musician will always be more important than the technology.

Great post btw digidad, one of the best to be posted in a long time.

http://www.createdigitalmusic.com Peter Kirn

Okay, this note is directed at the comment I just deleted.

If you call a person on a comment thread "a piece of s***," your comment will be deleted, period. Jeez. And as for free videos, just go to the creator and ask for a refund of all the money you paid them, okay?

Now, look, as for constructive criticism, please continue. It helps us get better.

And as for musical criticism, by all means, *however*, it's always better taken if you say "what I really like / what really inspires me is — xxx."

One of the jokes in the music demo business is, after a while, you make *really awful music* in your demos. That's not a comment on either of these videos — I mean from my personal experience teaching and doing demos. The thing is, if you're focused on showing the technology, you're probably not focused on showing the music. If you're focused on the music, you're probably not focused on showing the technology — even if you spent a lot of time investing time in that technology and learning the tools to get what you want.

So, very often, I think the antidote will be "wow, look at this MUSIC, it's amazing." Right now, most of my CDM inbox is full of technology tips, not music tips. And when people send music tips, they're about… themselves. That's cool, please keep doing both those things, but it'd be great to have some music from people who inspire you, too.

Koro Toro

But wouldn't be nice if these technology demonstrations did actually create something that sounds interesting. It would also be a lot more inspiring for the public and would also be a good marketing move by the companies.

I am sure that the bad music in these video clips would be a big turn off for potential customers. I don't want to sound like some kind of marketing expert, because I'm not, I am a computer musician like most people on this board.

But I really do think for all of these new computer music tools and toys out there, I don't see many great artists using them. They are fascinating and fun to play with and in theory are supposed to make it much easier to make music. But are they able to make good music? That is a question I have been asking myself a lot lately. Of course there's some interesting computer made music out there, but to me it doesn't stack up to the amount of computer music tools/software/gizmos etc.

http://www.createdigitalmusic.com Peter Kirn

@Koro Toro: Really? No big-name artists using the latest-and-greatest technology? Herbie Hancock, Radiohead / Thom Yorke, Bjork, Nine Inch Nails, etc. don't count? It's funny, I've been hearing a growing number of people making this argument, and I just don't see it. In fact, oddly, the people who seem least likely to use some of the advanced technology are people in the dance music scene, a lot of whom – while terrifically skilled DJs – aren't actually playing live, even in some of the so-called live sets.

That said, yes, I think there's a greater technology > new music ratio. But — hey, that means tremendous opportunities for all of us to take all this tech with which we've been gifted.

As for better videos, please go grab a camera and show them up!

dyscode

@digidad /Toro Peter

joining is late

but I am signing this 100%

I have seen it yesterday at the NI Traktor Kontrol X1 release Party (Tokyo). You CAN do 'experimental'and'offbeat' music with all the sequencing (and DJing herefor) technology. It was nice overall and there was some pretty crazy DJing going on – but far too less IMHO.

With the integration of Max, OSC, Scripting and DAWs the possibilites just exploded to only the mind being the limit. But Positivism still holds a strong grip.

Sorry Peter, I meant "new (last 2 years?) /innovative/ experimental/ interesting" artists. I say this because I think of this technology as advanced/innovative etc. But most of the music (that i hear) coming from it isn't.

Wallace Winfrey

@digidad

While I am a fan of all the artists you mentioned, I'm bewildered as to how any of those artists' music would serve as good fodder for a music technology demo.

The reason simplistic, familiar music is used for technology demos is because the focus of the demo is not the music, it's the technology. Most of the time, the video-maker is trying to communicate a concept, like, "when these buttons are pressed in this sequence, you make the amen go like this!" Structurally familiar easily-defined sounds allow the viewer to more quickly relate what the instruments controls are doing to the sample, etc.

@Peter Kirn, I think it's impossible to ignore price in this comparison. There's simply too great a divide between 50 Euros and $500+, especially once feature sets and potential start to even out. I'd say that Live is still gonna be easier for 90% of users to pick up. On the other hand, a product like M4L is not necessarily aimed at new users, and with such a large investment required up front just to see what the thing does outside demo limitations, the 50-Euro investment is bound to look way more attractive to tinkerers.

There's also an undeniable David vs. Goliath element in play: Ableton and Cycling have done some things in the past few years that, while they probably make lots of sense to actuaries and support staff, have left at least a few users feeling a bit cold. Compare and contrast with Renoise, which doesn't charge for point releases (I bought my license years ago and still haven't been asked to upgrade) and has an amazingly low price of entry (not to mention what's probably the most generous demo in the industry).

To be honest, if what I've read about Renoise's coming bidirectional API is correct, I don't see any reason why a "PD4Renoise" suite of PD objects doesn't get released just to make things interesting. In the end, we the music-makers benefit, and at the very least, it'll be nice to have a functionally comparable solution to Live/M4L available on Linux.

Wallace Winfrey

One more thing about Renoise's point releases: they usually pack more into a single point release than most companies do in several major versions. While it's true that Ableton and Cycling in general don't usually charge for point releases, when taken in the context of my first sentence, I think my point is clear: even if Renoise cost $300-400 to begin with, it'd still be an amazing bargain because that initial investment will get you at least 3 years of updates.

Immon

Well its good too see novation offering some decent support anyway.

Regarding the quality of music in these types of demos, well lets be honest step sequencers are best known for their bleepy and robotic output. These vids are merely proof of concept.

What I fail to understand is why it took so long. I worship step seq's as much as the next man but are they not quite simple devices really? I wish I still had my electribe from way back in 1999!

dyscode

@Toro

<cite>I say this because I think of this technology as advanced/innovative etc. But most of the music (that i hear) coming from it isn’t.</cite>

I feel the same, but the difference here is that you are not limited to sequence one parameter (like a good old Korg SQ-10 etc.) or just one soundclip (what essentially is the core of any tracker)

anymore. You can now sequence of complex set of (interapplication talking) instruction that generate and/or control sound.

But as I said before: not so many even care or dare to explore that. They are happy with simple single track sequence aligning.

digidad

Wallace W.: I definitely agree that Markus Popp probably wouldn't be the best spokesperson to promote a product like Launchpad or the Monome, but there's a more philosophical point to be made here: If all demos are just showing what can be done in terms of what is already known, because that is the only way not to alienate a potential customer, then aren't these new wonderful inventions contributing to re-establishing an already prevailing "order"?

Many of the demos I've seen of, say, Launchpad is basically just showing a more *effective* way of doing things that can already be done, and so look like instruments that are functioning more in terms of rationalizing something, rather than inventing something?

I don't know the answers, I just know that there is something about, say, Launchpad that should excite me, but then again there is also something there that disappoints me.

s ford

sorry if my language and terms above were too blunt. my point was a little strayed off. i just meant to say the musician makes the technology great but not the other way around!

as for my monome/launchpad point, i think that is not because the technology isn't great or the people who are showcasing them aren't talented but it's too early days. the full potentials haven't been learnt yet. eg i wouldn't be wrong in saying it was a good few days before charlie christian really made people aware of the elecrtric guitar or dj shadow's mpc60 performances.

when it comes to electronic music, in the 80's the 303/808/909 came out and totally bombed. it took ages for people to know how to fucking rule with them. one word in short ACID. hell fucking yeah.

personally, i think we live in the golden era. a week's wages can get you so much great stuff, be it a netbook with linux and pure data, a 4 track, an acoustic and a microphone etc etc.

back to renoise, if venetian snares can in anyway be helped to make even more sick tunes than he already makes i'm delighted!

some interesting debates above though.. keep up the good work all!

http://www.mynameiskaneel.com kaneel

Damn, discussing about genres is so 99.

I'm so 99.

I guess you guys are taking it by the wrong side by the way… there are a lot of bad IDM music released because nowadays, getting into music making is that easy. Most people just get their bunch of samples, free plugs, cracked softwares and just put fxes and weee, "this iz all idm ya know"… oh and I'm not even talking about tutorials.. If you knew the number of people who actually contacted myself to ask me what was the hex I put at this or that minute.. they don't get the idea behind a tutorial and just want to redo it from A to Z.

So well yeah, anyway, JBL made a nice patch… and yeah, renoise rocks… who around here is a former tracker and know for how long we, former trackers, have been waiting for something like renoise?

http://www.music-interface.com Mat

Just in case: I wrote some stepsequencers in Max for the Lemur. You can see them in videos and description on my side: http://music-interface.com/

They even got some functions (like ind. steprange on each track)I would miss on those mentioned here. My sequencers work with max-runtime – no m4l. (actually I don´t understand the hype these days) That means you can use em in Logic, Cubase… and of course ableton without BUYING Max

http://www.larsby.com/johan/ Johan Larsby

I to have created a step-sequencer. In c++ code, that I've published on my blog http://www.larsby.com/johan/?p=331 it's for os x though, but it's a very nice steppingstone that does all the CoreMIDI stuff you need to get launchpad up and running.

http://www.createdigitalmusic.com Peter Kirn

I'm not discounting (so to speak) the price of Renoise; like I said, it's an 800% price difference.

But I'd go one step further, and say that if you're going to get the benefits of the host, the first most important thing is the degree of control the host itself provides, with MIDI and (hopefully soon) OSC.

But yes, I think the ability to then add a flexible scripting layer on top of that that's been built from the ground up only to work with this host, that also doesn't add to the cost of the tool for the developer or the user, that'd be a big deal.

@Koro Toro: If you're saying you haven't heard music made in the last two years with technology *introduced* in the last two years that blew you away, I'd say that's because it can take some significant time to assimilate technology for us non-Borg. On the other hand, though, Max (and Pd) is really 10+/20+-year-old technology, so this is fair.

http://www.createdigitalmusic.com Peter Kirn

@Johan: Nice work! Hope to cover that soon.

I think the other thing that's throwing people off is that there's so much Launchpad stuff, they may not be looking *past* the Launchpad to see what people are doing with the sequencer. But people are making nice things. And yes, tech demos are not going to be major music releases, again, unless you're Borg.

dyscode

who around here is a former tracker and know for how long we, former trackers, have been waiting for something like renoise?

Hand raised! I spent all the 90ies and some of the 80ies with Trackers, and now I will spent the 10ths with them again it seem.

I was already using Alex Zoltov`s SunVox. This is since a most powerful Tracker and works on the iTouch also.

And until this date of renoise 2.5+ news, I´d even say SunVox was still more versatile for the $15 it costs (for Mac, Win, Linux AND Win CE/mobile aka Palm Smartphone. $5 for iTouch).

It seems like apples and oranges, isnt the first video a melodic sequencer then the renoise one just a pattern triggerer?

Im more interested in the first one jsut for the note stuff, breakbeat type patterns and random trigger isnt very entertaining to me.. But max4live is far too expensive for the complete package..

http://www.createdigitalmusic.com Peter Kirn

Of course, you can easily create a melodic sequencer with Renoise and a rhythmic sequencer with Live. My point was, the ability to hook directly into the Pattern Matrix in Renoise, and the fact that the tools you need either are now or soon will be free with the product, to me give it an interesting angle.

All due respect to Max for Live, but I can at least say this — it won't be your only option. I don't think Ableton would disagree with me on that, either; it's designed as an extension to Live. Having other choices is important.

I think it's also worth stating the obvious and saying that M4L is here now, and that it's got a full palette of objects to choose from, not to mention years of development and a committed user base.

Renoise's Extensions aren't here yet, and noone's really sure what their full capability is, although if their track record is any indicator at all, our expectations will likely be exceeded, in both breadth and depth of the implementation as well as the stability.

http://www.createdigitalmusic.com Peter Kirn

On the other hand — and I feel the same way about Live — much as I love the power of a scripting or patching engine, I think the ability to control the host itself is paramount. Before you start patching Max or writing Lua, can a host be designed flexibly enough that you can do what you want in the host itself, just using MIDI/OSC? So, for this reason, I think the ability to have internal modules and control really matters a lot. That's not to take away from these other solutions, but I would like to see more improvement in that sphere.

mp

Endless choices generally means less music created – at least this has been my experience. Haven't even looked into any of this max/live stuff.

http://www.myspace.com/djnewmiracle newmiracle

Another thing to think about:

Some people are just looking for 'monome' functionality. Step sequencers, 64 button sample players, sending plain CC messages, but nothing much more.

So, if you want to use a 64 button grid in a simple way, with MIDI control- what are your options? You can go for programmable music environments like PD, Max, M4L. These have a high learning curve, and possibly prohibitively expensive. The APC and Launchpad can navigate clip grids in Live, but this can be limiting and also proprietary (…and I'm a Ohm64 user. D'oh!), which is less flexible. Then you can have a monome, which has a great 'killer app' selection. However monomes are expensive, and if you don't have Max, the apps can only play samples and not control VSTs/MIDI (correct me if I'm wrong about this).

This new Renoise update gives me hope for a cheap, simple, straightforward way to do achieve these things. However, I think there'd be a good market for some kind of 64 button grid VST/AU instrument or effect. Make it MIDI mappable, stable and flexable (notes, sample trigger, step sequencers). But until that happens, Renoise looks pretty good to me.

lu

I feel as if i'm missing something because you buzz around so much about it,

but to me renoise appears totally overrated and i don't see how it could be beneficial for my music or even stimulating.

B.C. Thunderthud

I read your last Renoise post twice, followed the link and even read a bunch of the Renoise forum and I'm still not sure what this matrix thing is.

Let me tell you what I think it is and someone tell me where I'm wrong. It seems to be an optional replacement/addition to the regular pattern sequencer that allows you to play multiple patterns at once. This catches them up with Buzz, Sunvox, Fruity Loops, LSDJ, etc. but also leapfrogs them by also allowing track-level manipulation (mute/unmute or more?).

The application in the video requires Max and allows Live-like performance but is not the only/core application of the matrix. Is that close?

Anyway it looks promising, is there more that I'm missing?

lu, I feel the same way about Live; to each his own.

jbl

@ Digidad

I agree that my demo sounds like old stuff, it's mostly that after spending hours on my patcher I wanted to make a quick video to demo it and did not take the time to build a song with it… I simply loaded perc sounds, took 10 minutes to spread them around my renoise file and that's it.

However, I take your challenge and I will make a more complete song using my sequencer and it won't be 1992 breakbeat.

http://lilibits.blogspot.com/ lilith

Renoise vid >>>>> Live vid

definite buy @ US$75, I like trackers. rather disappointed in the pricing for Live8 + Max for Live, guess I save money by upgrading from one of the copies of LiveLite I have laying around but still

http://www.toysun.com Toy Sun

@digidad /Toro Peter +1

What I see is that not all that interactive. In my own limited experience with "clip launchers" and step sequencers, I'm not always sure what is going to happen, and that's with a song I may have had loaded and been playing with for weeks.

So there is a lot of stuff that I hear that I'm pretty sure the player of the buttons wasn't too sure of herself – in other words: "what are mistakes in this kind of music making?"

Just my, oh…. 1 cent, I guess.

http://louddjs.com Lucid

now… is I'm a linux user of Renoise, would the novation controller still work?

http://www.createdigitalmusic.com Peter Kirn

@Lucid: The Novation hardware won't work under Linux, because it requires a driver. But the monome will, and any class-compliant controller will — which opens up various other controllers, including (amusingly enough) the APC40.

HEXnibble

The 2.5 feature announcement was enough for me to finally take the plunge. I'm coming from Ableton Live and I have to say it looks like Renoise will be replacing it outright. Up until now NI Maschine was my favorite tool to "get lost in the flow" but I'm enjoying using Renoise so much that it might be all I need. It took me a while to get my head around the tracker interface but now I get the zen-like simplicity and efficiency about it. I'll probably keep Live + Maschine combo around as that provides a totally different workflow and results but I doubt that I'm going to buy Max4Live or even any more Live updates. I want to support the more open model that Renoise represents.

empolo

"Up until now NI Maschine was my favorite tool to “get lost in the flow” but I’m enjoying using Renoise so much that it might be all I need."

Damn, I thought it was just me. After just two days of getting to know my way around Renoise, I thought "hmm, I could sell my Maschine and use the bread for other gear". Not to mention that I have it running under Fedora (12) as well as Windows – I love them for that!

http://www.covops.org Andreas

too noisy in the house to work on a day like this – fav. blogs instead

"So with that in mind, anyone want to take to issue my sense of why Renoise’s controllable Matrix View has some advantages over Max > Live API > Live, or even just having to build things in Max — aside from price?"

The concept shown for reNoise is lovely, because of the nested nature of it. It seems more impressive to us because it plays higher level "clips" rather than the Novation-made video which played plain midi.

It's like comparing Mlr to a normal step sequencer- obviously mlr will be "more impressive", because it is treating higher-level entities, in the case of mlr it treats full loops, in the case of renoise it treats loops as well, really.

I like the *concept* behind the renoise implementation, but I would like to see how it integrates with a full project – will it be like back in the day when I did a midi step seq in Live using clips; it would basically take an entire Live Set -?

audiofeen

It's a great looking tool… pity akai dont think they have to do something similar for there customers..

john

renoise is owning all the "i have a good idea lets charge people thousands of pounds to use software" to hellwith ableton propellerhead logic cubase pro tools they had this comming to them imho.

things will only get better we already have big plans to dev interesting new FREE ways to use renoise dont like the tracking interface? welcome renoise 2.6 were we the end user can just make our own front end.

id be concerned if i was selling daw software the dawn is coming were u pay 60 quid and your set for life

BrenMcGuire

For Renoise, there is a new Launchpad Step Sequencer plugin available called "Lauflicht". Since Renoise released an API for programming plugins, there is a lot movement.